STATE OF HARYANA Vs. SHANTI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Smt. Shanti Devi widow of Mangat Ram filed a suit for declaration to the effect that she was owner in possession of house bearing No.63/998 situated at Baldev Nagar, Ambala City and that the order dated 27.10.1999 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Ambala exercising the power of Collector, Ambala ordering escheat of the house in question in favour of the State to be illegal, null and void. Challenge was also raised to the order dated 01.08.2000 passed by the Commissioner, Ambala in appeal preferred by the plaintiff holding the same to be not binding upon her rights in any manner. The consequential relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from interfering in her peaceful possession over the house in question was also prayed for.

(2.) Briefly noticed, it was pleaded that the plaintiff alongwith her husband Mangat Ram had migrated from Pakistan in the year 1947 and had settled in Baldev Nagar, Ambala. Smt. Chanan Devi widow of Diwan Chand had also migrated from Pakistan and had been rehabilitated in the same locality in the house adjoining the house of the plaintiff. It was pleaded that Chanan Devi had been allotted house No.63/998 in Baldev Nagar, Ambala City. Chanan Devi was stated to have died issueless. Plaintiff pleaded that her husband Mangat Ram used to look after Chanan Devi and had rendered services to her during her life time. It was pleaded that Chanan Devi had executed a legal and valid Will dated 06.12.1959 in favour of Mangat Ram thereby bequeathing the house in question in his favour. Such Will was stated to have been scribed by Jagan Nath and two attesting witnesses were stated to be Gian Chan s/o Bakshi Gurditta Mal and Tej Ram s/o Kishan Chand. It was stated that Chanan Devi died on 10.12.1959 and upon her death on the basis of Will in question her husband Mangat Ram had become owner in possession of the house in question. It was further pleaded that Mangat Ram i.e. late husband of the plaintiff had suffered a decree dated 05.09.1986 in her favour with regard to the house in question in Civil Suit No.298/1986 titled as Shanti Devi Vs. Mangat Ram and such decree was passed by the then Senior Sub Judge, Ambala. It was further pleaded that one Jagdish Chander Arora was residing in the house in question as tenant and on the basis of a false complaint having been lodged by such tenant against the plaintiff, an enquiry had been got conducted by the Deputy Commissioner and order dated 27.10.1999 had been passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Ambala exercising the power of Collector ordering the escheat of the house in question in favour of the State. The plaintiff preferred an appeal before the Commissioner but the same was dismissed vide order dated 01.08.2000.

(3.) The suit was contested by the defendants wherein, it was admitted that Smt. Chanan Devi had been allotted the house in question. Further, the Will dated 06.12.1959 alleged to have been executed by Chanan Devi in favour of Mangat Ram i.e. husband of the plaintiff was disputed. It was stated that the alleged Will dated 06.12.1959 was a forged and fictitious document. As such, it was contended on behalf of the defendant/State that the order dated 27.10.1999 passed by Collector as also the order dated 01.08.2000 passed in appeal were valid and legal orders and in term thereof, the house in question vested in the State.